Scroogie Boy's blog

September 20, 2006

Samsung and Pentax, sitting in a tree...

Well, lookee: Engadget breaks the news about the Samsung GX-10 DSLR... I suppose that my guess about Samsung bankrolling the development of the Pentax K10D turned out to be pretty close! I'm not sure what they intend to do in order to keep the brand identities separate, but that's a better problem than not having a competitive product to sell...

Posted by cwirving at 9:03 PM

September 19, 2006

When you are #4, you try "more harder?"

As I mentioned a few posts back, the DSLR photography marketplace is dominated by Canon/Nikon/Sony, leaving the crumbs for everybody else. So, what is #4 player Pentax to do? Apparently, they have decided to try even harder than the big three: their newly-announced K10D body is a very impressive entry in the just-sub-$1000 DSLR battle and they have made it clear that they intend to introduce lenses with built-in high speed focus motors (a la Canon USM and Nikon SWM). These are all the right product moves at what appears to be quite aggressive prices, but the question still remains: how do you come this far back in the field and regain market relevance? I suspect that their new partner Samsung is partially bankrolling this effort but it still is an impressive play by a company arguably fighting for its life!

Posted by cwirving at 1:37 PM

September 7, 2006

Nikon zoom lens reviews

And now, as a comparison to yesterday's list of Canon zoom lens reviews, here are some Nikon zoom lens reviews... The review sites are slrgear.com [SLRGEAR], photodo.com [PHOTODO], Ken Rockwell [KR], Thom Hogan [TH] and photozone.de [PHOTOZONE]:

Nikon wide zoom	Reviews
12-24mm f/4G ED-IF AF-S DX	[SLRGEAR] [PHOTODO] [KR] [TH] [PHOTOZONE]
17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF-S	[KR] [PHOTOZONE]
Nikon regular zoom	Reviews
17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S DX	[SLRGEAR] [KR] [TH] [PHOTOZONE]
18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED AF-S DX	[SLRGEAR] [KR] [TH] [PHOTOZONE]
18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S	[SLRGEAR] [KR] [TH] [PHOTOZONE]
24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF AF	[KR]
24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S	[KR] [TH] [PHOTOZONE]
28-70mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF-S	[KR]
Nikon short tele zoom	Reviews
18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX	[KR]
24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR	[SLRGEAR] [KR] [TH] [PHOTOZONE]
Nikon tele zoom	Reviews
18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR DX	[SLRGEAR] [PHOTODO] [KR] [TH] [PHOTOZONE]
55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED AF-S DX	[SLRGEAR] [PHOTODO] [KR] [TH] [PHOTOZONE]
70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR	[SLRGEAR] [PHOTODO] [KR] [TH] [PHOTOZONE]
70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED AF	[SLRGEAR] [KR] [TH]
70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR	[KR]
80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF	[KR] [PHOTOZONE]
80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED AF VR	[KR] [TH] [PHOTOZONE]

Posted by cwirving at 10:45 PM

September 6, 2006

Canon zoom lens reviews

As promised, here is a collection of online lens reviews of Canon EF and EF-S mount lenses... The review sites are slrgear.com [SLRGEAR], photodo.com [PHOTODO], Luminous Landscape [LL] and photozone.de [PHOTOZONE]:

Canon wide zoom	Reviews
EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM	[SLRGEAR] [PHOTODO] [LL] [PHOTOZONE]
EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM	[SLRGEAR] [LL] [PHOTOZONE]
EF 17-40mm f/4L USM	[SLRGEAR] [PHOTODO] [PHOTOZONE]
EF 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
Canon regular zoom	Reviews
EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM	[PHOTOZONE]
EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM	[SLRGEAR] [PHOTODO] [PHOTOZONE]
EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM	[SLRGEAR] [PHOTO.NET] [PHOTOZONE]
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM	[SLRGEAR] [PHOTOZONE]
EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM	[PHOTOZONE]
Canon short tele zoom	Reviews
EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM	[SLRGEAR] [LL] [LL] [PHOTOZONE]
EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM	[PHOTOZONE]
EF 28-105mm f/4-5.6 USM
EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM	[SLRGEAR] [LL] [PHOTOZONE]
Canon tele zoom	Reviews
EF 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 USM
EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM	[LL] [PHOTOZONE]
EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM	[SLRGEAR] [PHOTODO]
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM	[SLRGEAR] [PHOTODO] [PHOTOZONE]
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM	[PHOTOZONE]
EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM
EF 70-200mm f/4L USM	[PHOTODO] [PHOTOZONE]
EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM	[PHOTOZONE]
EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM	[LL] [PHOTOZONE]
EF 80-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II
EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM	[PHOTODO] [PHOTOZONE]

Posted by cwirving at 8:53 PM

September 5, 2006

Canon vs. Nikon lenses, part 1

For a first pass at comparing the big two's lens offerings, here is a table of their most common zoom lenses with estimated street prices as of early September 2006. The order was tweaked to put the most similar closest to each other, the stabilized lenses are highlighted in yellow and the directly comparable lens pairs are highlighted in purple: This isn't the end-all do-all comparison, but it does show some interesting direct comparisons (plus the not-so-direct EF-S 17-85 vs. Nikkor 18-70 kit lens battle). Also, from the Canon side, it looks a lot like they value IS at a $400-$500 premium per lens while Nikon seem to go for a lower premium for VR.
Next time around, I'll try to round up some reviews...

Posted by cwirving at 9:06 PM

August 26, 2006

Whither Sony's next move?

I'll keep the entry short since the blog formatting is still all messed up... Yesterday, I wrote about Sony's lens mount system and how it sets it apart (but not in a good way) from Canon/Nikon. One thing that strikes me with their lens lineup is that there are very few cropped-frame lenses. So, I think that the logical way for Sony to make the most of their aquisition will be to introduce a full-frame DSLR to compete with the Canon EOS 5D. I'm as much in the dark as anybody else when it comes to Sony's plans, but this is one of the few ways that they can actually leverage their system's oddities to their advantage... It may be an image-building exercise above all, but they have to be desperate for something to set them apart in (at least marketing-wise) a good way. So, there, that's my prediction for the next year or so.

Posted by cwirving at 5:41 PM

August 25, 2006

Choosing the system

As I mentioned in the last post, DSLR shopping -- at least when you're starting from a blank slate -- is all about choosing the (lens) system. Fundamentally, all the bodies from the majors are impressive pieces of gear, but the differences in philosophies and in lens systems are the true differentiators. So, here are my impressions as an outsider: First of all, there are exactly three players left: Canon, Nikon and Sony (new owner of the Minolta A-Mount system). Everybody else has more or less devolved into irrelevance (a pity, I know, but there is no working around the fact that these three companies own between 80% and 90% of the market). I guess that this makes things somewhat easier. Lens systems are, for obvious reasons, very stable. Each of the mounts in question: Canon's EF (full-frame) and EF-S (cropped-frame) mounts, Nikon's F-mount and Minolta/Sony's A-mount have been around for a long time (well, EF-S is fairly recent, but since current EF-S bodies can also take EF lenses, the combination of the two is what the consumer cares about). We do seem to be at a point in time where the market segmentation choices of the big two are also surprisingly stable: Canon and Nikon appear to have purposefully chosen to be in lockstep for most of their product lines. Virtually no two products from the two companies compete directly head-on -- the product ranges compete head-on, but the price point of each individual product appears to be chosen to fit between the competitor's models. This seems to hold true for their lenses and accessories as well as camera bodies. The one wildcard is going to be the market segmentation chosen by Sony: having only one DSLR out on in the market right now, it is difficult to tell whether they are going to continue Konica-Minolta's two pronged attack from the recent (Maxxum 5D/7D) era, go back to the original 3-prong Maxxum 5000/7000/9000 split of the early autofocus film era (which is quite similar to Nikon's D50/D70/D200 current product split), or try something completely different. So, going back to the technical merits of the systems, the big two have a huge advantage over Sony's A-mount: in-lens focussing motors. Both Canon's current USM lenses and Nikon's AF-S lenses have motors in the lens that allow faster focussing and, equally importantly to the enthusiast, manual focus override. It appears that the A-mount world as it stands doesn't have an answer to those features. It will be interesting to see whether the market will drive Sony to address this or whether the reality is that so few consumers (as opposed to professionals) care about this that they can continue on as-is. I think that the distinction matters to me as a prospective buyer, but time will tell whether I'm in the minority. One differentiation strategy that Sony inherited from Konica-Minolta -- one that may redeem A-mount in many's user's eyes -- is the choice to move anti-shake technology into the body, whereas Canon & Nikon (by choice or necessity) put the technology into selected lenses. This gives Sony leverage to claim anti-shake accross the board. The technical merits of each anti-shake system are subject of much debate, but the interesting consequence is that this flattens the A-mount marketplace: all lenses -- from Sony or third parties -- share he same focus system and all have the same anti-shake ability. A cost advantage, for sure.

Posted by cwirving at 10:24 PM

August 20, 2006

Some DSLR shopping observations

This is probably in the "duh!" category for most folks who have bought a DSLR (digital single-lens reflex camera), but it still is something that took me a while to understand: you aren't buying a camera! You are actually buying into a camera system (at least into a lens system). The big 3 of the DSLR world (Canon, Nikon and Sony) have some rather different lens and accessory systems to go with their cameras and, given how the pace of camera improvements is making camera bodies fairly short-term investments, the lenses are going to outlast the camera body by quite a long while. Unfortunately, camera reviews online and in print are geared to a feature-by feature deathmatch between bodies when, in reality it doesn't matter so much: once you are captive of a system, your choices are that manufacturer's offerings... To that, you add the fact that the range of bodies reflect each manufacturer's philosophy on product design and market segmentation, and you get quite the overwhelming challenge if, like myself, you are starting basically from scratch. In some respects, the manufacturers are guilty of maintaining the state of confusion: for example, I don't see Canon and Nikon coming out with an easy to understand explanation of their lens systems' alphabet soup -- which, in Nikon's case goes back a good 30+ years. How a newbie is supposed to know the intricacies of the system's various metering and autofocus generations (and how they relate to modern cameras) is unclear. Sure, they just want you to buy new gear -- but that isn't a real answer because they still have a fair number of internal inconsistencies in their current lens and accessory ranges that means that every camera won't necessarily work (fully) with each lens and vice-versa. What a pain in the ass!

Posted by cwirving at 2:49 PM

August 13, 2006

HDR photography

One neat oddity I stumbled early on in my photographic web surfing is this interesting post on High Dynamic Range (HDR) photography. I followed the link to the HDR Flickr group and my curiosity was immediately piqued. The blog post is right that HDR photography often lacks subtlety and realism but the thing that I think has huge potential is that with a trio of bracketed exposures and a minimum of postprocessing, you can make up for one of digital photography's big failures relative to film: the dynamic range (at least at the consumer level) is far inferior to good film -- you can do anything you want with the picture once it is loaded in Photoshop, but you often run out of source information before you can do the touch-ups you want on contrasty shots. This opens up some pretty interesting avenues. I was curious, so I downloaded the evaluation version of Photomatrix and took a trio of exposures out in the back yard. No tripod -- just the Coolpix 700 on the table. The composition isn't intended to be artistic as much as to overcome the sensor with contrast. It does that very well. :-) The tone-mapped HDR picture is, well, pretty unnatural (especially since I pushed the saturation to see how much I could get out of the image)... But, I think that it does show promise in that you can take the trio of exposures and gather vastly more detail from the shot than possible with just one. From this little experiment, I can't say that I particularly like the tone-mapped look, but it probably bears closer investigation with a full version of Photoshop (I only have Elements) or another editor that can work with deeper (more bits per pixel) images.

Posted by cwirving at 5:14 PM

Photography

One bad habit I have is that when I'm under pressure, my mind tends to wander -- I never generate as many things to go off on a tangent as I do when I actually am busy on something else... So, in this infamous tradition, I have rekindled my interest in photography -- vicariously as my hardware on hand are my trusty 80's vintage Minolta X700 film SLR and a Nikon Coolpix 700 point-and-shoot digital camera. Neither being entirely exciting hardware by today's standards. Still, I've created a new "Photography" category in this blog to post some of my discoveries as I find them...

Posted by cwirving at 5:02 PM